ESPN Just released

[Grits and Shins]

The players are paid there worth... If they were not worth it, they wouldn't have gotten the contract offers... Tomlinson and Manning put asses in seats, sell jersey's and the like. They make the league and teams ten fold the amount of dollars they have on their contract.

What's the difference between an athlete making a ton of money versus a CEO of a company? An athlete can run faster, jump higher, throw farther while a CEO uses his wits and smarts to run a company.

 

I'm so tired of the CEO analogy.

 

When NFL players have to work their way up from the bottom and through years of hard work make it to the top as the CEO then you can begin to think about that analogy.

 

NFL players are awarded millions of dollars based on their percieved value. When companies start hiring their CEO's directly out of college and paying them millions of dollars because they believe they have the right guy then tell me how CEOs and NFL players are alike.

[piratesownninjas]

My concern is how this will impact fantasy football.

 

I wouldn't be worried about a strike at this point. The Commish, owners and players organization know that they cannot take on another strike like the one they had in the 80's. This is the smartest sport in the world, and they've learned their lesson from the past and seeing what happened to baseball, basketball, and hockey. The owners and players will come to an agreement. They have over 3 years to figure something out. They know that any brand, even the NFL can't take a hit that would be inccoured from a strike.

[piratesownninjas]

I'm so tired of the CEO analogy.

 

When NFL players have to work their way up from the bottom and through years of hard work make it to the top as the CEO then you can begin to think about that analogy.

 

NFL players are awarded millions of dollars based on their percieved value. When companies start hiring their CEO's directly out of college and paying them millions of dollars because they believe they have the right guy then tell me how CEOs and NFL players are alike.

I'm so tired of the players being overpaid analogy. I gave you plenty more in the post, but you only chose one part...

And NFL players have worked their way up from the bottom. I guess you forget that they've devoted their lives from teenagers in high school staying after school let out... They were doing sprints and lifting while their friends went home and did whatever...

In college they spent 40+ hours devoted to football and kept their GPA high enough for academic standards... It's not like they've been relaxing by the pool for their entire life.

What about my other point, about players putting asses in seats, selling jersey's and the like. You may have a point when it comes to the top ten picks in a draft and perceived value, but those are not the players that have the problem. It's the vets that have proven their worth.

Do you not think Peyton Manning is worth the 120 million that he's signed for? Can he single handedly sell out a stadium? Yes. Does he give you a shot at the super bowl every year? Yes. Does he always rank near the top of jersey sales? Yes. Teams wouldn't spend 120 million on a guy that couldn't return them 300 million.

[Grits and Shins]

I'm so tired of the players being overpaid analogy. I gave you plenty more in the post, but you only chose one part...

And NFL players have worked their way up from the bottom. I guess you forget that they've devoted their lives from teenagers in high school staying after school let out... They were doing sprints and lifting while their friends went home and did whatever...

In college they spent 40+ hours devoted to football and kept their GPA high enough for academic standards... It's not like they've been relaxing by the pool for their entire life.

What about my other point, about players putting asses in seats, selling jersey's and the like. You may have a point when it comes to the top ten picks in a draft and perceived value, but those are not the players that have the problem. It's the vets that have proven their worth.

Do you not think Peyton Manning is worth the 120 million that he's signed for? Can he single handedly sell out a stadium? Yes. Does he give you a shot at the super bowl every year? Yes. Does he always rank near the top of jersey sales? Yes. Teams wouldn't spend 120 million on a guy that couldn't return them 300 million.

 

The comment that players are overpaid is not an analogy ... please explain how you think it is.

 

While your NFL players were devoting their lives to sprints and lifting weights, the future CEO's were devoting their lives to getting an actual education. He takes CORE classes, does the homework, studies hard until he understands the material and graduates with a meaningful degree. The athlete that graduates has six pack abs and a piece of paper that says he graduated. Playing at the high school level and at the collegiate level are NOT the same as working your way up in the ranks. It is equivalent to all the class projects done by an academic student being called considered as working one's way up to the level of CEO.

 

So what that players put asses in seats. How many players have owners hired that failed to put asses in seats (can you say Ryan Leaf)? The owners take the risk and reap the rewards. Peyton Manning wouldn't have a stadium to play in and wouldn't be able to put a team together and draw a crowd without an owner.

 

If I develop a product at my place of employment that suddenly becomes a hot item and ends up generating billions of dollars I don't get a dime of that revenue because my company owns the products I develop. If I want to own my own product I have to quit and open my own company up. The players are EMPLOYEES of the NFL owners ... if they want to own the product then they need to quit and open their own company.

[Big Score 1]

....many owners lay out all or a portion of the cost required to build a place to play the game.

Owners becoming financially involved in new stadiums, is actually to their benefit.

 

PSL's & premium seating receipts are taken out of calculations for gross revenue when an owner becomes involved with building a new stadium. Also naming rights along with any & all profits genereated at the new stadium that are not NFL related eg: Monster Truck, Motocross, Concerts, Conventions etc are all exempt from gross revenue calculations.

 

CBA Article XXIV

[detlef]

again.

 

What a crappy analogy. Do you really want the players running the league? Are you nuts?

 

The players are currently taking 60% of gross revenues. That's an outrageous amount for any company to pay one sector of its employees. Do you think that is the only operating expenses that NFL teams have - the players' salaries?

 

You are truly unbelievable, but your amazing naivete' is kind of cute.

While we're talking naive, let's talk about comparing apples to oranges. Like throwing labor figures out there and thinking that applies to anything. Now, my labor % is half that, which is what my industry requires to survive. However, my labor is not also my product. My labor takes raw product that I pay another 30% on and turns that product into a salable item among other things.

 

None the less, from what I've read, despite this labor number, the owners are coming in on the right side of 10% profit margin, which is not bad. And that's the only number that really matters, not how you get there. Oh, and as for laying out all that jack to buy the team? It would cost that much if it wasn't worth it.

 

As for relating the plight of the owner, you should realize that I am an owner. That I understand the value of being the guy who's financial ass is on the line. But think for a second which is more likely to happen. For an NFL owner to lose his ass, he'd need to screw up pretty bad. This thing is a runaway train that is just spitting out money. On the other hand, every single year, guys are having their bodies absolutely beaten. So, I think the players risks are much more real than the owners.

 

All that said, I don't do much to actively put money in any of these guy's pockets. I don't go to games, I don't buy gear, I'm not clamoring my cable company to pick up the NFL network and I watch some, but not a ton of football on network TV. So, ultimately, I couldn't give two craps about how this goes down. However, they'd better play it right. There's no shortage of examples of sports going after a big payday now and losing tomorrow's customers. Take Boxing. Now there's nowhere near the universal appeal but the switch to pay per view put some money in their pockets in the short term but completely cut off new customers. Compared to what it was 20-30 years ago, it is barely a niche sport now. If the NFL continues to price out the everyday fan and replace them with corporate players, the game will eventually suffer.

 

Of course, it's one of those things that I would hate to be able to say, "I told you so" because I enjoy the game and would prefer it not suffer.

[Big Score 1]

While your NFL players were devoting their lives to sprints and lifting weights, the future CEO's were devoting their lives to getting an actual education.

One is exercising the physical matter.

 

One is exercising the grey matter.

 

They both work themselves extremely hard in order to excel at their chosen professions.

 

I am equally impressed with the drive & dedication needed for them to succeed.

 

However, there is one distinction between the two professions.

 

There are some silver spoon CEO's, who are only in the position they're in, because of birthright. Those CEO's I am not as impressed with.

 

There are no silver spoon NFL players that I'm aware of.

[Big Country]

THe playes can cover operating costs just as easily as the owners can. Its not like there won't be investors lining up. I understand capitalism, took a course.

 

Oh, so you mean owners?

 

What do you think the investors are? They are the ones fronting the financial burden, they are the ones that reap the rewards if succesful, they are the ones that lose if not.

 

Now, you al lcan carry on with your arguments. I just found it ironic that one of Seahawks first arguments about getting rid of the owners was for the players to line up owners.

[piratesownninjas]

While your NFL players were devoting their lives to sprints and lifting weights, the future CEO's were devoting their lives to getting an actual education. He takes CORE classes, does the homework, studies hard until he understands the material and graduates with a meaningful degree. The athlete that graduates has six pack abs and a piece of paper that says he graduated. Playing at the high school level and at the collegiate level are NOT the same as working your way up in the ranks. It is equivalent to all the class projects done by an academic student being called considered as working one's way up to the level of CEO.

 

So what that players put asses in seats. How many players have owners hired that failed to put asses in seats (can you say Ryan Leaf)? The owners take the risk and reap the rewards. Peyton Manning wouldn't have a stadium to play in and wouldn't be able to put a team together and draw a crowd without an owner.

 

If I develop a product at my place of employment that suddenly becomes a hot item and ends up generating billions of dollars I don't get a dime of that revenue because my company owns the products I develop. If I want to own my own product I have to quit and open my own company up. The players are EMPLOYEES of the NFL owners ... if they want to own the product then they need to quit and open their own company.

From your first paragraph I can deduce that you were never a student athlete and you have no idea what it's like to be one. You're also making assumptions that no athletes study hard... Your entire first paragraph is absolutely asinine in that sense. Once again, a student athlete has to take all of the courses, THEN spend 40+ hours in the weight room, watching film, so on and so forth.

 

So what players puts asses in seats? Are you kidding? Full seats=full pockets. If your stadium is empty, you're not making money. Ryan Leaf was a guess that went horribly wrong, but that's the risk you take WITH A ROOKIE, which I said was a different subject, as these are Vets that have the problem. I'm also very aware that without owner's Manning wouldn't be playing... That has nothing to do with it. I never said an owner doesn't deserve anything. I simply said that a player is worth whatever you're willing to pay them. They wouldn't be willing to pay them unless they thought it was a wise investment.

 

Your last point is nice in theory I guess, but it doesn't translate to the NFL... They are employee's of the NFL, but you lose traction in the sense that in the "real world" employees can be replaced. You cannot replace Tomlinson, Manning, Brady, Moss or Urlacher. This isn't the real world. Those rules don't apply.

[piratesownninjas]

One is exercising the physical matter.

 

One is exercising the grey matter.

 

They both work themselves extremely hard in order to excel at their chosen professions.

 

I am equally impressed with the drive & dedication needed for them to succeed.

 

However, there is one distinction between the two professions.

 

There are some silver spoon CEO's, who are only in the position they're in, because of birthright. Those CEO's I am not as impressed with.

 

There are no silver spoon NFL players that I'm aware of.

extremely well spoken.

[detlef]

One is exercising the physical matter.

 

One is exercising the grey matter.

 

They both work themselves extremely hard in order to excel at their chosen professions.

 

I am equally impressed with the drive & dedication needed for them to succeed.

 

However, there is one distinction between the two professions.

 

There are some silver spoon CEO's, who are only in the position they're in, because of birthright. Those CEO's I am not as impressed with.

 

There are no silver spoon NFL players that I'm aware of.

Exactly, who says which is more valuable in society.

 

For the most part, every single thing we do outside of feed and shelter ourselves and procreate is a deviation from our basic purpose on this planet. So, one guy devotes his life to studying how to make money in business sell god knows what and another devotes his to being a top caliber football player. Why is one noble and the other frivolous? Guys go into business to make money (well, at least anyone with what it takes to be successful enough to make it big). So, why is that a "real education" and which is silly?

 

Hell, take stockbrokers. What do they do? They take money from one guy, hand it to another, and take a slice for themselves. Is that "better" than being a pro football player? Is that more "real"? Sure, they provide a service. If they're good, they'll advise you well and hand your money over to the right guys. Well, does your favorite ball player not provide a service?

 

OK, here's a better one. Say you do things the way Grits says is the right way and you go to school and get an education in marketing and advertising. Do you really provide society as a whole anything all that important? I mean, in the big picture. Your job is to figure out how to get people to buy one thing over another, once again, carving off a slice for yourself. Why is this actually needed? Without ads, we'd still be able to find the goods and services we needed. The only people who care about advertising are those who want to drive a disproportional amount of business their way. Of course, then everyone does it and nobody wins but the advertisers.

 

Now, this is not intended to dog stock brokers or marketing people, rather to remind everyone that sports is not unlike other things that somehow are considered "more important" to society. That devoting your life and skills towards excelling at them is no different than so many other professions.

[Riffraff]

LOL

Some people definitely can only view this business from the perspective of an employee.

They'd never make it as a business owner.

 

If players ran the league: there would be no stadiums, or refs, or rulebooks, or legal representation, or safety from crime, or drug testing, or advertising, or TV contracts, or radio contracts, or coaches, or well anything that makes up organized professional ball.

 

It would be the uneducated leading the uneducated. Sandlot ball. Players can't pay themselves.

Starting up a league is huge $$$$$. Something the players wouldn't have if they tried to go it alone.

They only have $$$ now because a group of guys already had the coin via means other than football.

[piratesownninjas]

LOL

Some people definitely can only view this business from the perspective of an employee.

They'd never make it as a business owner.

 

If players ran the league: there would be no stadiums, or refs, or rulebooks, or legal representation, or safety from crime, or drug testing, or advertising, or TV contracts, or radio contracts, or coaches, or well anything that makes up organized professional ball.

 

It would be the uneducated leading the uneducated. Sandlot ball. Players can't pay themselves.

Starting up a league is huge $$$$$. Something the players wouldn't have if they tried to go it alone.

They only have $$$ now because a group of guys already had the coin via means other than football.

I don't think the players are trying to start up a knew league... I think they're just aware that the goods that they have for sell can't be bought anywhere else.

 

I think the biggest problem is rookie contracts... If you can manage to slot them at a lot lower price, you can afford to pay vets more and keep everyone happy.

[Big Country]

I look at this a lot like McDonalds.

 

The "league" is the corporate entity McDonald's.

 

The "owners" are the franchisees that have physical locations that the consumer gets their burgers from.

 

The "players" are the crew that run the location (include in this all other employees from coaching staff, to trainers to front office personnel)

 

The "owners" pay the league a fee for the right to operate a franchise, just as someone wanting to run a McDonald's does. They pay a portion of their sales to the "league" for the ongoing right to run said operation.

 

The "owners" then go out and hire the "players" that produce their product. They pay them a wage that they feel attracts the best crew possible at a price that still enables them to turn a profit.

 

I guess I see no issue with the owners wanting to maximize their take and I see no problem with the players wanting to maximize their take. It is what they should try to do. Finding that point that satisfies both parties is what is key.

[Riffraff]

I don't think the players are trying to start up a knew league...

I know, but some very ignorant comments in this thread suggest that the players could run a league by themselves.

Wouldn't happen ever. It takes non-football players to run a football business.

 

Revenue sharing, rookie contracts, veteran minimums, and retirement plans will be big in the next round of contract talks. May even have some debate about how Goodell has been running the show.

[Big Country]

I think they're just aware that the goods that they have for sell can't be bought anywhere else.

 

Thing is that as of now they also can't be sold anywhere else. Find me a rival professional football league willing to pony up that coin and then you may have a more competitive environment (outside of team vs. team for FAs) for player services. Others have tried (USFL, XFL) but as of now, none have succeeded.

 

The NBA has the basketball market, but the Euro leagues are growing quickly and at some point (not neccessarily very near future) I believe they may be in a legitimate position to rival the NBA in terms of what teams can and will offer top talent from the US.

[detlef]

I look at this a lot like McDonalds.

 

The "league" is the corporate entity McDonald's.

 

The "owners" are the franchisees that have physical locations that the consumer gets their burgers from.

 

The "players" are the crew that run the location (include in this all other employees from coaching staff, to trainers to front office personnel)

 

The "owners" pay the league a fee for the right to operate a franchise, just as someone wanting to run a McDonald's does. They pay a portion of their sales to the "league" for the ongoing right to run said operation.

 

The "owners" then go out and hire the "players" that produce their product. They pay them a wage that they feel attracts the best crew possible at a price that still enables them to turn a profit.

 

I guess I see no issue with the owners wanting to maximize their take and I see no problem with the players wanting to maximize their take. It is what they should try to do. Finding that point that satisfies both parties is what is key.

Sorry, but this is as out of whack as implying that the players could just do away with management and run their own league. The "players" that work at each individual McDonalds don't have anywhere near the importance on how that McDonalds does that players do for a specific team. These "players" are 100% expendable and are basically heating up the same product as the next branch. I have never known of anyone who'd ever preferred the burgers at one McDonalds over another.

 

NFL players are, quite simply not expendable. If they were, why would a guy like PacMan Jones get another gig. There's basically one way you can find yourself out of a job as an NFL player and that is, quite simply, if you're not good enough to produce on the field. So, those that can get paid.

[piratesownninjas]

NFL players are, quite simply not expendable. If they were, why would a guy like PacMan Jones get another gig. There's basically one way you can find yourself out of a job as an NFL player and that is, quite simply, if you're not good enough to produce on the field. So, those that can get paid.

Exactly.

[Chief]

Sorry, but this is as out of whack as implying that the players could just do away with management and run their own league. The "players" that work at each individual McDonalds don't have anywhere near the importance on how that McDonalds does that players do for a specific team. These "players" are 100% expendable and are basically heating up the same product as the next branch. I have never known of anyone who'd ever preferred the burgers at one McDonalds over another.

 

NFL players are, quite simply not expendable. If they were, why would a guy like PacMan Jones get another gig. There's basically one way you can find yourself out of a job as an NFL player and that is, quite simply, if you're not good enough to produce on the field. So, those that can get paid.

 

Let me guess, if Brady and Manning were in a car wreck together, disabled, the NFL falls apart? Don't think so. The next guy in line takes over, that simple. Farve retired, oh no, Green Bays going to fall apart, lose value, and close the doors. Not. Did 49's lose any sleep when Montana and Young were no longer there? 2 qb's as great, if not better than Manning and Brady? Well, golly, 49's are still there. Players are irreplaceable is a joke. They are well paid, some for way more than they are worth, due to percieved value, which some owners never recieved. Last I looked, Pittsburghs still there after Bradshaw, Swann, and all the rest are gone. Tony Dorsett? Earl Campbell? Emmit Smith? Barry Sanders? Hmmm

SeahHen 21, you have alot to learn. Players make the league??? LOLOLOLOL 2000 guys are going to decide who's payed what, especially themselves, handle advertising, TV contracts, seat prices, stadium prices, coaches salaries, referee pay, NFL rules, and son, and son on. Who handles players disputes or who gets more say then? The higher drafted guys? The guys who produce the most? One thing I do bet, the players themselves would end all this rookie contract nonsense.

The owners are who they are, through good busines sense, not due to a 40 yard time. Real people such as engineers, lawyers, doctors, to take a small example, pay their own way through college, for twice as many years, before they can start benefitting from their pay. In the real world, 1 arrest can terminate your job, quickly. Players are payed damn well, had a free ride, and should be careful to bite the hand that feeds them. Yes, they are replaceable, same as any of us. Before go teaching me all the schematics, yes I run my own small business, but that doesn't matter one iota to what this conversation is about. Todays economy, most of us skilled trades are taking a licking, getting 1/2 the pay of what we were 2 years ago. This goes for a ton of business's across the board. However, the players aren't making less, they make more, and could care less what the economy is doing. Why? Most of them are millionaires, something they would never be, or close to, without the owners.

I can see the players being well paid, and the need for a better retirement/disablity fund, and most definitely, a better rookie situation being a salary cap. I can also see the owners making what they do, and all the people they pay, lawyers, coaches, scouts, front office people, stadium officials, and whatever other countless expenses are. Ask me, the players should be very happy to have what they do, all the current ones anyways, even if they were ONLY getting 50% of the Gross. Players deserve more or all? Puleasseeeeeeeee.

 

Edited to add, Detlef, this is not directed at you, but a bunch of posts that I personally think are way off base on some perspectives. Just my opinion,.

Edited May 20, 2008 by Chief

[piratesownninjas]

Let me guess, if Brady and Manning were in a car wreck together, disabled, the NFL falls apart? Don't think so. The next guy in line takes over, that simple. Farve retired, oh no, Green Bays going to fall apart, lose value, and close the doors. Not. Did 49's lose any sleep when Montana and Young were no longer there? 2 qb's as great, if not better than Manning and Brady? Well, golly, 49's are still there. Players are irreplaceable is a joke. They are well paid, some for way more than they are worth, due to percieved value, which some owners never recieved. Last I looked, Pittsburghs still there after Bradshaw, Swann, and all the rest are gone. Tony Dorsett? Earl Campbell? Emmit Smith? Barry Sanders? Hmmm

SeahHen 21, you have alot to learn. Players make the league??? LOLOLOLOL 2000 guys are going to decide who's payed what, especially themselves, handle advertising, TV contracts, seat prices, stadium prices, coaches salaries, referee pay, NFL rules, and son, and son on. Who handles players disputes or who gets more say then? The higher drafted guys? The guys who produce the most? One thing I do bet, the players themselves would end all this rookie contract nonsense.

The owners are who they are, through good busines sense, not due to a 40 yard time. Real people such as engineers, lawyers, doctors, to take a small example, pay their own way through college, for twice as many years, before they can start benefitting from their pay. In the real world, 1 arrest can terminate your job, quickly. Players are payed damn well, had a free ride, and should be careful to bite the hand that feeds them. Yes, they are replaceable, same as any of us. Before go teaching me all the schematics, yes I run my own small business, but that doesn't matter one iota to what this conversation is about. Todays economy, most of us skilled trades are taking a licking, getting 1/2 the pay of what we were 2 years ago. This goes for a ton of business's across the board. However, the players aren't making less, they make more, and could care less what the economy is doing. Why? Most of them are millionaires, something they would never be, or close to, without the owners.

I can see the players being well paid, and the need for a better retirement/disablity fund, and most definitely, a better rookie situation being a salary cap. I can also see the owners making what they do, and all the people they pay, lawyers, coaches, scouts, front office people, stadium officials, and whatever other countless expenses are. Ask me, the players should be very happy to have what they do, all the current ones anyways, even if they were ONLY getting 50% of the Gross. Players deserve more or all? Puleasseeeeeeeee.

 

Edited to add, Detlef, this is not directed at you, but a bunch of posts that I personally think are way off base on some perspectives. Just my opinion,.

You could find players to play Manning, Brady, and Favre's positions, but not replace them.

Yes, the niners organization probably lost a ton of sleep when Montana and Young were gone. It's something that they still haven't recovered from years later.

 

Edit-Not disagreeing with your entire post, just poking at it.

Edited May 20, 2008 by piratesownninjas

[Big Country]

Sorry, but this is as out of whack as implying that the players could just do away with management and run their own league. The "players" that work at each individual McDonalds don't have anywhere near the importance on how that McDonalds does that players do for a specific team. These "players" are 100% expendable and are basically heating up the same product as the next branch. I have never known of anyone who'd ever preferred the burgers at one McDonalds over another.

 

NFL players are, quite simply not expendable. If they were, why would a guy like PacMan Jones get another gig. There's basically one way you can find yourself out of a job as an NFL player and that is, quite simply, if you're not good enough to produce on the field. So, those that can get paid.

 

I am talking about the structure, not neccessarily the value of the "player" to the org. Same basic structure, the franchisee is the one taking the most risk, thus the one garnering the highest potential reward when the risk pays off.

[detlef]

Chief, you certainly make some fine points. However, the image that gets sold to the average guy is that the players are getting over on the owners. Believe me, these guys didn't get to where they are by letting people get over on them. Are players "overpaid"? Hell yes, but no more so than the owners are.

 

Of course, this is America and you get paid what you can. If you own a franchise in something as profitable as the NFL, god bless, milk that for what you can. Of course, if you're 6'5" 250 and can run a 4.4 40yd dash, same goes for you.

 

Like I said, I'm sort of in it for free. I don't directly put money in the NFL's pockets and really don't patronize most of the major sponsors (not out of principle, mind you I just don't drink Gatorade or Bud Light and I don't eat at McDonalds, etc.). So, I'm just along for the ride. I don't even live in the city of my lifelong favorite franchise. If, for some reason, these guys kill the goose, I'll just move on. Mind you, they're a long, long way away from doing that.

[Seahawks21]

Let me guess, if Brady and Manning were in a car wreck together, disabled, the NFL falls apart? Don't think so. The next guy in line takes over, that simple. Farve retired, oh no, Green Bays going to fall apart, lose value, and close the doors. Not. Did 49's lose any sleep when Montana and Young were no longer there? 2 qb's as great, if not better than Manning and Brady? Well, golly, 49's are still there. Players are irreplaceable is a joke. They are well paid, some for way more than they are worth, due to percieved value, which some owners never recieved. Last I looked, Pittsburghs still there after Bradshaw, Swann, and all the rest are gone. Tony Dorsett? Earl Campbell? Emmit Smith? Barry Sanders? Hmmm

SeahHen 21, you have alot to learn. Players make the league??? LOLOLOLOL 2000 guys are going to decide who's payed what, especially themselves, handle advertising, TV contracts, seat prices, stadium prices, coaches salaries, referee pay, NFL rules, and son, and son on. Who handles players disputes or who gets more say then? The higher drafted guys? The guys who produce the most? One thing I do bet, the players themselves would end all this rookie contract nonsense.

The owners are who they are, through good busines sense, not due to a 40 yard time. Real people such as engineers, lawyers, doctors, to take a small example, pay their own way through college, for twice as many years, before they can start benefitting from their pay. In the real world, 1 arrest can terminate your job, quickly. Players are payed damn well, had a free ride, and should be careful to bite the hand that feeds them. Yes, they are replaceable, same as any of us. Before go teaching me all the schematics, yes I run my own small business, but that doesn't matter one iota to what this conversation is about. Todays economy, most of us skilled trades are taking a licking, getting 1/2 the pay of what we were 2 years ago. This goes for a ton of business's across the board. However, the players aren't making less, they make more, and could care less what the economy is doing. Why? Most of them are millionaires, something they would never be, or close to, without the owners.

I can see the players being well paid, and the need for a better retirement/disablity fund, and most definitely, a better rookie situation being a salary cap. I can also see the owners making what they do, and all the people they pay, lawyers, coaches, scouts, front office people, stadium officials, and whatever other countless expenses are. Ask me, the players should be very happy to have what they do, all the current ones anyways, even if they were ONLY getting 50% of the Gross. Players deserve more or all? Puleasseeeeeeeee.

 

Edited to add, Detlef, this is not directed at you, but a bunch of posts that I personally think are way off base on some perspectives. Just my opinion,.

NO NO NO NO. THe players HIRE somebody to think for them, rather than the thinking people hiring the players to make all the money for them.

 

 

 

 

Lets simplify this...

who should get the biggest piece of the pie?? Owners or players?? When you shrink the players piece, the owners get a bigger one, which IMO is way messed up.

 

Don't compare players to any other job. Other jobs make and sell products. The players, in this case, ARE the product. THey are not employees, they are the actual product. Without the players, the NFL will fail. The owners will have no product at all. The players hold all of the power, and don't even know it.

 

IF they started their own league....does anyone have the balls to say that it would fail?? Would Manning and Brady not get ratings?? Would the stadiums not let them rent dates for games?? Could they not hire people to do the books for them??

 

There would only be one single difference......there would not be a white guy getting rich off of all these players. Thats it. Thats all. The league would not all of a sudden not be able to make money. They need the owners for NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. What does Tom Brady and Bill Belichick need an owner for?? They can't play the game without one?? People wouldn't watch if there was no owner???

 

The only reasons this hasn't happened yet is because the players are too afraid that it would fail and then they would be blacklisted, which is exactly what happened to baseball. If they had enough unity, they could push the owners right out of the money. If all of the players agreed to start a new league, and they signed contracts for tv, there is absolutely no way that it would fail. Not with how popular professional football is in this country. Don't get me wrong, it would take some balls, but the owners do so little in this league other than take all of the money, that the players could survive and play to put the money in their own pockets, rather than that of their owner.

[detlef]

I am talking about the structure, not neccessarily the value of the "player" to the org. Same basic structure, the franchisee is the one taking the most risk, thus the one garnering the highest potential reward when the risk pays off.

Well, perhaps you'd find it comforting to know that the average NFL team is clearing about twice what the highest paid players make per year. So, the owner does have the highest potential reward. Again, and at this point, the "risk" is not that big (which explains why teams cost so damned much). They've got a massive amount of money assured to them each and every year before a single customer walks through the turnstyles.

[piratesownninjas]

who should get the biggest piece of the pie?? Owners or players??

How about a 50/50 share?